Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,276   Posts: 1,534,705   Online: 920
      
Page 1 of 14 123456711 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 132
  1. #1
    stradibarrius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Monroe, GA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,382
    Images
    163

    645 format vs. 35mm???

    I read a thread recently that said basically that the 645 negative was not that different from a 35mm and so was pointless.

    I have an RB67, two 645 systems and several nice 35mm cameras. so I am familiar with all three systems.

    I am curious what many of you think. Sometime I wonder if I need all three formats??? I'm sure you will make points that I haven't considered.
    "Generalizations are made because they are generally true"
    Flicker http://www.flickr.com/photos/stradibarrius
    website: http://www.dudleyviolins.com
    Barry
    Monroe, GA

  2. #2
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,240
    Images
    148
    645 is a great format, I say that from a position of starting with 35mm and then moving to 6x6 & Large Format before shooting 645.

    The difference in quality between any of these formats is very much more noticeable 35mm and 645 (or 6x6), 6x7 is not that much larger than 645 and the additional bulk and weight were what tipped me into choosing a Mamiya 645 system after my Mamiya C33 & C3 were stolen in the 1980's. I never regretted making the decision.

    However in a search for ven more quality I did look at the RB67 after a colleague was loaned a demonstration system but decided I'd prefer to get a 5x4 Field camera, I already shot 5x4 studio & technical work. Part of my reasoning was the weight & bulk weren't far different and as I almost6 always used a tripod then 5x4 gave me more control with movement etc.

    My 645's still get some bursts of use as they are great to use hand-held shooting people etc. I've looked again at RB67's & RZ's as tehy can be fou8nd for next to nothing but the bulk still puts me off.

    Ian

  3. #3
    Jerevan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Sweden
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,859
    Images
    9
    For the paper size I most often use (18x24 cm) the 6x4.5 is perfect, it enlarges full frame and I don't need to fuss with cropping. I have dipped my little toes into 6x4.5 waters but I feel it would be a really nice format for me if I could find the right sort of camera (A scale Zeiss Ikon Ikonta 531 with a lazy shutter does not fall into that category!). It seems to give me the benefits of the medium format while not needing a mule to haul the equipment.

    When I think of it, I think I could even trade my 6x6 (Rolleiflex) for a Bronica or a Fuji.
    Last edited by Jerevan; 11-25-2010 at 09:38 AM. Click to view previous post history.
    “Do your work, then step back. The only path to serenity.” - Lao Tzu

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Jersey Channel Islands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    430
    Blog Entries
    2
    5I use 35mm,645 and 6/6, I must admit I prefer 645 or 6/6 to 35mm and will often use 645 in place of 35mm simply because of the higher quality 645 is a very capable format, and certainly has an edge over 35mm, with some equipment being not a lot bulkier than the smaller format,RICHARD

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Above the Hills, south of Rome(Italia)
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    177
    Images
    13
    i use 35mm, 6x6 and 6x7. I find 6x6 too close to 6x7. Also the squared format is tricky to be printed. I was wondering whether exist 6x4,5 backs for my Hasselblad 501 CM.....
    Anyway i think that the difference between 35mm and 645 is relevant.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Southern USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,769
    It's not just a matter of negative size but also the resolution of the lenses for each format.
    A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral.

    ~Antoine de Saint-Exupery

  7. #7
    stradibarrius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Monroe, GA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,382
    Images
    163
    Jerry you are correct about the lenses. My Mamiya M645 MF lenses are great IMO! But my Nikon 35mm lens are excellent a well.
    I put a speed winder on my M645 so it handles like a big 35mm and I like it a lot more.

    This format thing is on my mind a lot right now. This goes to some of the threads where I foucus more on the gear than the photo???? I just hate having gear around that I do not use...
    "Generalizations are made because they are generally true"
    Flicker http://www.flickr.com/photos/stradibarrius
    website: http://www.dudleyviolins.com
    Barry
    Monroe, GA

  8. #8
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,240
    Images
    148
    Have to agree about the quality of the Mamiya 645 lenses it's one of the reasons I've kept my cameras so long. However I'm shooting more 6x6 at present and find I really like the square format, also TLR's are quick, easy and light, so I carry one alongside my LF camera.

    Ian

  9. #9
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Ignacio, CO, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,676
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    One huge difference for my old eyes is that with the "6" wide film, I can get a decent feel for a negative's potential without a contact print or putting it in an enlarger. With 35mm it's tough to see "just a little" blur in the negative even with a loupe.

    Another big difference is in perspective. With 35mm (and LF) cameras I find it tough to get the camera low enough many times. With a WL finder it's the opposite. MF Mamiyas can give me both perspectives easily.
    Mark Barendt, Ignacio, CO

    "We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Anaïs Nin

  10. #10
    hpulley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Guelph, Ontario, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,214
    Images
    75
    I check my 35mm negs before printing by putting them in the enlarger. Enlarge to 8x10 or 11x14 on a focus sheet only and use a focus tool and you can check for blur just fine...

    Sigh, my tanks and enlarger are for 35mm at most. I want to try MF but it just isn't practical so I am squeezing the most I can out of 35mm which means for best enlargements I must shoot with sharp lenses at their optimal apertures onto good sharp film. Delta 100 with a good lens does a great job at 11x14 so while I am constantly pining for MF here I should really be happy with what I have.
    Harry Pulley - Visit the BLIND PRINT EXCHANGE FORUM

    Happiness is...

Page 1 of 14 123456711 ... LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin